Beware the Black Tea Party.

[WestCoastLib]

I am a black man. I am a progressive. I am an atheist.

The last two descriptors I used are not overly common. Particularly the third one. My family history is from the south. My father moved to the West Coast, but most of my family is still back east or down south. My grandfather was a minister. His grandmother was born a slave. Most of my aunts, uncles and many of my cousins are ordained. My family is very large (we are talking about 200-300 people at family reunions in which we need venues to be booked like conventions. I've never taken a survey, but I'm probably the only one that doesn't believe in god.

I'm close with my family and I love them greatly. I recently just visited some of my family and we discussed a large number of issues. Many of these issues I needed to fight back against. Other times I needed to bite my tongue out of the ingrained idea I was taught for respect for the elders in my family.

My family is pretty typical of an southern African American family. And their values are very conservative on social issues. Their views are mixed on economic issues and not so monolithic, but I do find their views on social issues, particularly LGBT issues, very discouraging. They can be very much "fire and brimstone" about how they think our society is becoming too immoral.

I remember when the Tea Party began. As crazy as they are, sometimes I forget that it started as a part of the same groundswell that was outraged about the bank bailout. This wasn't a particularly conservative thing to be upset about. There were people on both sides of the political aisle outraged about that one. There was a recent post about "allies" and it reminded me of this. There were democrats and republicans that were allies against the bank bailout at that time. That outrage was pretty quickly co-opted by some nuts that took it in a completely different direction and we now have the Tea Party. The vast majority of liberals didn't go down that path and the "alliance" broke up shortly after the bank Bailout but, believe it or not, some democrats did peel off and turn Tea Party crazy at that point. Racism likely being the biggest factor in that, with Obama's ascendancy to the presidency.

#BlackLivesMatter - Yes. The message needs to be heard and understood. I have problems with the methods of the movement, however. Who they have chosen to attack, how they have gone about it and, in some cases, who has chosen to ally themselves with the movement.

Like OWS, if there is no structured leadership and clear agenda, the message will be muddy.

Like the protests after the bank bailout, if the message is anger directed at the status quo, taking it to it's logical conclusion is to burn the whole thing down and rebuild. And that's a Tea Party message. That process of shouting down and dismissing the political discourse is simply one I can't get behind. The process of hijacking a party and holding it for ransom is what, on the right, has filled red districts with Scott Walkers. It's a method that has led to the clown car of crazy that we see gearing up for 2016.

I fear for this because I don't see any good outcome that doesn't involve working with democratic leadership, not attempting to hijack the process or shout it down. And, as my family roots indicate, many in the black community really are not progressive politically.

[NaturalHigh]

1. Great post!

[hifiguy]

2. Thank you for an excellent and enlighening post!

[Skittles]

3. critical thinking at its finest

[bbgrunt]

4. thank you. Interesting post and a caution worth considering.

[Thespian2]

5. K & R

Very intelligent and interesting post...

[SusanCalvin]

6. I'm bed and I wanna go to tired,

But before I go, thank you fellow atheist. Will check back.

[moondust]

7. K/R

[yuiyoshida]

8. K&R

[appalachiablue]

9. K & R. Appreciate the post and warning-

[passiveporcupine]

10. Thank you!

[AzDar]

11. K & R

[kwassa]

12. Your family is not the entire black community, and the comparison of BLM to the Tea Party is odious.

Your family might be typical for the region they live in, in the South, or it might simply be your family. The family reunion of black people I go to every Thanksgiving has about 100 people, and that is not even close to the whole family. I've never heard such attitudes out of any of them. I've also seen great progress in progressive issues here in the heavily black District of Columbia. There are certainly socially conservative African-Americans, but many with those views have evolved over time, too.

This is what I really don't think makes sense.

Like the protests after the bank bailout, if the message is anger directed at the status quo, taking it to it's logical conclusion is to burn the whole thing down and rebuild. And that's a Tea Party message. That process of shouting down and dismissing the political discourse is simply one I can't get behind. The process of hijacking a party and holding it for ransom is what, on the right, has filled red districts with Scott Walkers. It's a method that has led to the clown car of crazy that we see gearing up for 2016.

You are comparing BLM to the Tea Party This is really absurd. These BLM activists are about as far from the Tea Party as you can get. This is one big dog-whistle.

edit to add: The fact that so many of your family members are preachers in a conservative fire-and-brimstone denomination might vastly skew their outlook. There are no preachers in the extended family of my wife.

[mountain grammy]

13. K & R

[kwolf68]

14. Good post and stats bear out your observations

Black folks are FAR more Conservative than the traditional Liberal on issues such as LGBT issues, environment and school choice. It's a community the Democrats can't afford to take advantage of, because as the upward mobility of more and more black people take shape then they may well begin to become more hostile to progressive economic issues. I think in time black voting will fall spread out more with Republicans picking up more and more votes. The Republicans are just so completely incompetent in speaking to the black community they gain no traction, but don't expect blacks to vote 92% for the Democrats forever.

Anyway---great post by the OP!! Well done sir.

[Truprogressive85]

15. Sorry but no

As a black male to another I disagree

Was the SNCC a black tea party?
Was the black panther a black tea party ??

[MrMickeysMom]

17. How can you compare that to what happened?

What does this remotely have to do with what is taking place with these disrupters?

[Truprogressive85]

19. Just my opinion

Calling BLM a black tea party is insult

Making so called allies come down from their ivory towers no matter if it's sanders,Clinton,O'Malley is needed .The Democratic party has taken advantage for their most loyal voting bloc.

When black people are crying out to the politicians for help these same politicians only come around only during election season for photo ops .campaign funds,and getting votes.

I and others are fed up voting for a politicians who getting into office and just talk

[sabrina 1]

21. Making the Federal Govt PROTECT ITS CITIZENS from criminal, murderous

police, is what those who really care about this issue are TRYING to do. And since we know now who the disrupters were, the point is moot. The sad thing is, that this could affect the courageous and sincere Ferguson protesters who are out there almost every day, no one HERE has noticed much what has been going on there and in other cities btw, and I really hope it doesn't.

No sincere movement attacks its allies, from the beginning the whole thing was suspect, the NON TARGETING OF REPUBLICANS eg, and when I went to ask online, why they were not targeting their enemies I received no answer.

Now we know the answer to that question.

Anyone who USES this enormous issue as a political football, or for their own self interest, is already suspect in my view.

Where were all these 'concerned' people BEFORE ELECTION season began?

We tried here to get some interest in the Ferguson protests last year but just couldn't do it, because we knew that once the media went away, the whole thing would collapse unless people stayed engaged, joined the budding movement to make sure that after DECADES of both parties doing nothing, and the media refusing to cover the crimes, that THIS TIME that would not happen.

Sick of seeing politicians and their operatives USE these issues and all the rhetoric we hear every election season, only to be forgotten once the election is over.

THIS is NOT a political issue, it is a SOCIETAL tragedy and everyone needs to STOP trying to divide people over it, MAKING SURE it is never resolved, And I believe that is the goal of these disrupters and those who support them.

[rhett o rick]

34. What doesn't make sense with what you are saying is that of all the people in the Democratic Party

"ivory towers", Sen Sanders isn't one of them. I agree that the black community should be upset with the status quo Democrats that have been running the party. Sen Sanders is fighting against those same people. Why single him out in lieu of those responsible for the status quo? Attack the single most sympathetic candidate. What?

[MrMickeysMom]

16. K&R

Enter the great conversation… which cannot take place shouting it down.

[progressoid]

18. Rec.

You should post more often!

[tblue]

20. I would not conflate the Seattle protesters

with social conservatives, but you have made some interesting points. I'm black too, and I am truly distressed by the way Bernie Sanders, a genuinely decent man, was treated at the Seattle rally for Social Security and Medicare. While I applaud the protesters' boldness and I support what I believe are their goals, I am not down with every single thing they do.

Truth is, whether any of us likes it or not, progressive change requires us to have lots of allies, and I don't know how you get allies without civil discourse. It is important to rally in Ferguson, etc, but it's in Washington and other seats of govt where laws get made that govern all our lives.

Thank you for a thoughtful OP. I hope you and I can stay in touch.

[Go Vols]

33. Seattle's "Outside Agitators 206" & why they want to drive a wedge between BLM and Democrats

by
Lefty Coaster

We shouldn't judge an important movement like Black Lives Matter by the the excesses of a radical faction within the BLM movement. The instigators of a strident protest who drove Bernie Sanders from a stage yesterday were from a group named Outside Agitators 206. They created a Black Lives Matter Seattle facebook page just 2 days ago. Outside Agitators 206 seems to be a group that regards electoral politics as a inconsequential. They focuses on BLM and driving a wedge between BLM Movement and the Democratic Party. Their facebook page links to a site named Black Agenda Report run by a man named Glen Ford that included this reveling passage:To succeed, the Black Lives Matter Movement must transform the politics of Black America. By definition, that means declaring war on the Democratic Party, and forcing Black politicians and activists to choose between the Party and the people’s struggle.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/09/1410408/-Seattle-s-Outside-Agitators-206-why-they-want-to-drive-a-wedge-between-BLM-and-Democrats

[Babel_17]

22. That was an interesting read, thanks

Every organization is at risk from opportunists. It's up to the people to defend themselves, and their organizations.

http://www.bartleby.com/73/1593.html

“A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy. A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.”

[jwirr]

23. Excellent analysis. And for what it is worth I think you are absolutely correct. At least about this

Seattle group. The two girls have more interest in disrupting than gaining help for BLM. I only hope that we can keep the movement alive - the understanding of how important the original BLM message is and not get distracted by the rest of the message.

I remember taking black history in college and talking about what happened to the non-violent civil rights message at the end of MLK's life. I am not sure how correct the professor was but he talked about how the movement was co-opted by people who did not believe in non-violence. In that case he was talking about a part of the Black Muslim party. The part of the party that killed Malcolm X. He said that the movement lost the high ground at that point and the nation stopped listening. He compared it to the overall anti-war movement that had the same problem at the end.

[Kablooie]

24. Will they be voting for the Republican candidate do you think?

[WestCoastLib]

30. That was not the stated concern.

I'm more concerned about what they do to the democratic side. Most are highly unlikely to vote Republican in the current climate, though 10 years down the road, who knows what message changes might occur.

As far as voting goes, they would be more likely to not vote than vote republican. Though, the result could be the same.

But my concern, like I said, is in taking a position and attempting to turn away discourse and the attempt to stifle promising democratic candidates, like the Tea Party did with the more moderate republican candidates. And if there is no respect for liberal ideals and liberal democrats in this movement, then there is little than can effect liberal democrats in a positive way.

[Kablooie]

32. Got it. Their conservative views could pull the left even more towards the right.

It seems already that Democrats a shifting towards Eisenhowerian Republican views.

[DirkGently]

25. Who speaks for a leaderless movement?

The two people who shoved Bernie Sanders aside and prevented him from speaking associated with a different, more radical group, and only adopted the BLM moniker shortly before the Seattle event:

That's all well and good, except the protesters aren't actually part of the BLM movement.
The protesters are actually members of a group called Outside Agitators 206. You can see the connection here; this is the same "Press Release" as posted on the "Official" Seattle BLM Facebook Page. I am using quotes, because this is absolutely not an "official" page; it was created extremely recently and it seems to me and many others that these two women have co-opted the BLM movement and name to further their own, more extreme message. This is from their About page:

We are the Outside Agitators 206.
First off, we have four points of unity:

We center Black voices to celebrate and affirm Blackness. We believe that any movement to end anti-Black racism must be led by Black people.

We believe that everyone has a right to resist their oppressors and what resistance looks like varies for different individuals and different circumstances.

We don’t directly speak to corporate media, nor do we need them. We are our own voice.

Fuck the police: As an institution fundamentally rooted in white supremacy and anti-Blackness we reject the police presence in our communities, absolutely. It is our responsibility to hold each other accountable and keep each other safe.

Note particularly the last point. While the BLM movement is, so far, primarily about reforming our far-too-racist and milatarized police forces across the nation, they have not ever been about completely abolishing the police. This sounds to me more like what some are calling a "Black Nationalist" movement which is co-opting the BLM movement and Bernie's events to get more traction. It's unclear if these two protesters are related to those in Phoenix, but speaking as someone who was actually at the NN15 protest, I doubt that.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/09/1410195/-Seattle-BLM-Protest-Was-Not-BLM-Sorta

https://outsideagitators206.org/

OWS had similar issues with anarchists latching on and purporting to speak for everyone. An argument for some basic level of central organization to be sure.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

26. I think it's more 'OWS' than 'Tea Party'.

The message is large, the needs great, the passion great, but actions are more decentralized, and that means they're more open to being individualized, rather than follow defined steps. And I have to admit, there's a lot about the status quo that does need 'burned down' as it were. The fight to maintain the status quo is a conservative fight. If people want to claim the 'progressive' label, the fight should be more about HOW to change the status quo, rather than how to preserve it. And that extends to how we act politically as well.

[KittyWampus]

28. Thanks, my post directly below yours points out that the Tea Party was started/funded

by the Koch Bros and Scaife.

OWS probably is better analogy, IMO.

[WestCoastLib]

31. Agreed, there's a lot of OWS now, but...

Last edited Mon Aug 10, 2015, 12:45 PM - Edit history (1)

And I have to admit, there's a lot about the status quo that does need 'burned down' as it were. The fight to maintain the status quo is a conservative fight. If people want to claim the 'progressive' label, the fight should be more about HOW to change the status quo, rather than how to preserve it.

That's a very simplistic statement, I'd say.

Medicare is the status quo. Social Security is the status quo. Obamacare is the status quo. Rowe vs. Wade is the status quo. The EPA, FEMA, All of these things conservative want to "burn down".

Conservatives in this country,have not been about conserving anything for a long time. Particularly since they got hijacked by the Tea Party. They are now 100% the party of no government.

And the Tea Party achieved this by being willing to "burn down" their own party. They've succeeded.

There is a lot that we need to change, but burn it down? No that's not the answer. As liberals, I would say that one of our defining characteristics (some would say to the detriment of winning elections), is the desire to fight ideas with ideas, fight lies with truth and have actual respect for the democratic process, not just play lip service to the idea of Democracy.

[KittyWampus]

27. Way off base. The Tea Party was started and funded by Scaife and Koch Bros.

[Betty Karlson]

29. K&R well said. eom

[beam me up scottie]

35. A kick and a Hai there! from a fellow evil atheist!